Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Frank Coluccio Technology Forum - ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (1664)	5/26/2000 10:46:00 AM
From: ftth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1782

Hi Mike, first I need to correct one of the hasty answers I gave yesterday. Clearworks' interconnect agreement with GTE is for exchanging call traffic between their networks and GTE, for the voice portion of their service offerings (Clearworks (NOTE: as of yesterday, Clearworks now trades on AMEX with ticker CLW, so, good for them in shedding the OTC:BB baggage) has CLEC status in Texas and Nevada). As for the data portion, in a Jan '00 press release they have an agreement with AT&T for IP services (global Internet access, Extranet and Intranet services, remote access to AT&T secure IP backbone, managed firewall security, and secure virtual private networking for business customers). This appears targeted for their business customers though, so I'm not "clear<gg>" if this is their consumer arrangement also. So this is still an open question. re:>>don't you think they are simply positioning themselves to be bought by an incumbent? It's certainly possible that could be the end result, but I doubt whether management of any company would admit that was their goal. IMO you'd be more likely to first see an investment by an incumbent (or maybe even some deep-pocketed company you wouldn't expect) before an outright purchase, in order to provide them with working capital to see how far they can take their plan on their own. Would you agree? Your general line of thinking is supported by history though. It's pretty hard to grow from nothing to a world-wide data/telecom provider without someone snatching you up at some point along the way. At some point along the growth curve (and because these deployments require a hefty up-front investment in infrastructure), 50% annual subscriber revenue growth (I just pulled that 50% number out of thin air for the sake of argument) requires more cash to initiate new builds to support the growth than you're bringing in from your recurring revenue stream that you have going on in the background. The only choices would seem to be either slow your growth or have some partner fund it. Not many would choose the first route. Personally, I'd rather see them go at it on their own growth-wise, and see what they morph into through their own decisions, mistakes, and adjustments to market needs. But based on history you are probably right.